ORDERS:
Charanjit Singh, President
1 The complainant has filed the present complaint by invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act under Section 34, 35, 36and 38 against the opposite party on the allegations that the complainant is a senior citizen. The complaint is a heart patient and is suffering from some heart disease since November 2020. The complainant faced some heart problem and complainant got himself checked from Trehan Hospital Patti. Doctor of Trehan Hospital Patti advised the complainant for ECO Test. As per advice of doctor in the month of November 2020, the complainant approached the opposite party for conducting his ECO Cardiography Test and the opposite party has demanded Rs. 2,600/- for the same from the complainant. On 6.11.2021 complainant on the car of his son went to the lab of opposite party for conducting the above said test. Then the opposite party told the complainant that they will install/ affix their machine/Holter in the body of complainant and will insert sim in their machine/holter and opposite party told the complaint that the complainant can go to his home and on the next day the machine/holter be brought to the Lab of opposite party and then the result will be given by the opposite party to the complainant. On 06.11.2020, opposite party has installed the Holter/Machine in body of complainant. The complainant has paid Rs.2,600/- to the opposite party. The complainant requested the opposite party to issue the receipt regarding the payment of Rs. 2,600/-. But the opposite party told the complainant that they will issue the receipt later on. However, the opposite party issued receipt to the complainant on 18.11.2020. After installation of holter/machine the complainant came back to his home and the holter/machine was affixed/installed whole of the night and the complaint followed all instructions and directions as given by the Opposite party. On the next day i.e. on 7.11.2020 as per instructions and guidelines of the opposite party the complainant removed the holter/machine from his body and his son namely Ravdeep Singh went to Amritsar and has given/handed over the holter/machine to the Opposite party. On that day the opposite party has not given any result from the holter/machine and the opposite party told the son of complainant that due to fault in the holter/machine result has not been given. At that time son of complainant has requested the opposite party to return his amount of Rs.2,600/- because the Opposite party has not given any result of above said ECO test. But the Opposite party has not returned the amount of Rs.2,600/- to the complainant so far. The complainant has visited on the car for on about 120-130 Kilometer and has burnt fuel of Rs.950/- approximately and opposite party has wasted one day of the complainant when he was suffering from heart disease. The opposite party has received Rs.2,600/- from the complainant but has not given any result of above said test to the complainant and this act of the opposite party caused harassment physically as well as mentally to the complainant. The complainant has prayed that the opposite party may be directed to :-
- Pay Rs.2,600/- along with interest @Rs. 12% per annum from the date of payment till realization to the complainant.
- To pay Rs. 950/- i.e. fuel burnt by the complaint in the car.
- To pay Rs.50,000/- as damages and compensation.
- To pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses.
- Any other relief to which the complainant is found entitled to.
Alongwith the complaint, the complainant has brought on record Self Affidavit of ComplainantEx. C-1, Affidavit of Ravdeep Singh Ex. C-2, Self Attested Aadhaar Card of complainant Ex. C-3, Self attested copy of receipt Dated 28.11.2020 Ex. C-4, Self attested copy of result of ECO Ex. C-5.
2 Notice of this complaint was sent to the opposite party and opposite party appeared through counsel and filed written version by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not legally maintainable and same is liable to be dismissed. There is no negligence or deficiency on the part of the opposite party and as such, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. On 6.11.2021 the complainant approached the opposite party for conducting his ECO Cardiography test and the opposite party affixed their machine/ holter in the body of the complainant and thereafter the complainant went to his house. During the night, the complainant has not followed the instructions and directions given to him and even has not removed the machine as per instructions and guidelines given to the complainant and due to the said negligence and carelessness of the complainant there was no significance reading due to some artifacts and as such he was advised for review again with recording again but he has not done so intentionally and willfully and as such, the present complaint is not legally maintainable and does not lie. There is no deficiency and negligence on the part of the opposite party. This commission has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. The test was conducted at Dhillon and Manan Heart Care Centre, 7 Krishan Nagar, Lawrence Road, Amritsar and the alleged fees/ charges was paid at Amritsar and service of the opposite party was allegedly availed at Amritsar and as such, this Hon’ble Commission at Tarn Taran has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. The complainant is estopped by his act and conduct from filing the present complaint. On merits, it was pleaded that the complainant has filed this false and frivolous complaint with is not legally maintainable. On 6.11.2021 complainant approached the opposite party for conducting his ECO cardiography test and the opposite party affixed their machine/ holter in the body of the complainant and thereafter the complainant went to his house. During the night, the complainant has not followed the instructions and directions given to him and even has not removed the machine as per instructions and guidelines given to the complainant and due to the said negligence and carelessness of the complainant there was no significance recording due to some artifacts and as such, he was advised for review again with recording again but he has not done so intentionally and willfully. This was offered without any charge. The complainant is not entitled for any refund of the amount. The opposite party has denied the other contents of the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the same. Alongwith the written version, the opposite party has placed on record affidavit of Tajinder Singh Dhillon Ex. OP1/1.
3 We have heard the Ld. counsel for complainant and have also carefully gone through the documents on the file.
4 Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that he is a heart patient and is suffering from some heart disease in the month of November 2020. The complainant faced some heart problem and complainant got himself checked from Trehan Hospital Patti. Doctor of Trehan Hospital Patti advised the complainant for ECO Test. He further contended that as per advice of doctor, since November 2020, the complainant approached the opposite party for conducting his ECO Cardiography Test and the opposite party has demanded Rs. 2,600/- for the same from the complainant. On 6.11.2021 complainant on the car of his son went to the lab of opposite party for conducting the above said test. Then the opposite party told the complainant that they will install/ affix their machine/holter in the body of complainant and will insert sim in their machine/holter and opposite party told the complaint that the complainant can go to his home and on the next day the machine/holter be brought to the Lab of opposite party and then the result will be given by the opposite party to the complainant. On 06.11.2020, opposite party has installed the Holter/Machine in body of complainant. The complainant has paid Rs.2,600/- to the opposite party. The complainant requested the opposite party to issue the receipt regarding the payment of Rs. 2,600/-. But the opposite party told the complainant that they will issue the receipt later on. However, the opposite party issued receipt to the complainant on 18.11.2020 which is Ex. C-4. After installation of holter/machine the complainant came back to his home and the holter/machine was affixed/installed whole of the night and the complaint followed all instructions and directions as given by the Opposite party. On the next day i.e. on 7.11.2020 as per instructions and guidelines of the opposite party the complainant removed the holter/machine from his body and his son namely Ravdeep Singh went to Amritsar and has given/handed over the holter/machine to the Opposite party. On that day the opposite party has not given any result from the holter/machine, copy of result of ECO showing the result nil is Ex. C-5 and the opposite party told the son of complainant that due to fault in the holter/machine result has not been given. At that time son of complainant has requested the opposite party to return his amount of Rs.2,600/- because the Opposite party has not given any result of above said ECO test. But the Opposite party has not returned the amount of Rs.2,600/- to the complainant so far. The complainant has visited on the car for on about 120-130 Kilometer and has burnt fuel of Rs.950/- approximately and opposite party has wasted one day of the complainant when he was suffering from heart disease. The opposite party has received Rs.2,600/- from the complainant but has not given any result of above said test to the complainant and this act of the opposite party caused harassment physically as well as mentally to the complainant and prayed that the present complaint may be allowed.
5 Ld. counsel for the opposite party contended that the present complaint is not legally maintainable and same is liable to be dismissed. There is no negligence or deficiency on the part of the opposite party and as such, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. This commission has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. The test was conducted at Dhillon and Manan Heart Care Centre, 7 Krishan Nagar, Lawrence Road, Amritsar and the alleged fees/ charges was paid at Amritsar and service of the opposite party was allegedly availed at Amritsar and as such, this Hon’ble Commission at Tarn Taran has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. He also contended that on 6.11.2021 complainant approached the opposite party for conducting his ECO cardiography test and the opposite party affixed their machine/ holter in the body of the complainant and thereafter the complainant went to his house. He further contended that during the night, the complainant has not followed the instructions and directions given to him and even has not removed the machine as per instructions and guidelines given to the complainant and due to the said negligence and carelessness of the complainant there was no significance recording due to some artifacts and as such, he was advised for review again with recording again but he has not done so intentionally and willfully. This was offered without any charge. The complainant is not entitled for any refund of the amount. He further contended that there is no negligence on the part of the opposite party and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.. Ld. counsel for the opposite party has submitted authorities Civil Appeal No. 5215 of 2010 (arising out of SLP© No. 4525 of 2009) D/d 9.7.2010 ‘Senthil Scan Centre Vs Shanthi Sridharan and Anr.’ of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and A.P. No. 427 of 2001, D/d 24.6.2005 titled Krishna Hospital & Ors Vs P.Shanti & Ors. Of Hon’ble Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
6 Ld. counsel for the opposite party has taken objection that this commission has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. The test was conducted at Dhillon and Manan Heart Care Centre, 7 Krishan Nagar, Lawrence Road, Amritsar and the alleged fees/ charges was paid at Amritsar and service of the opposite party was allegedly availed at Amritsar and as such, this Hon’ble Commission at Tarn Taran has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. But has placed o record Adhar Card of the complainant Ex. C-3, which shows that the complainant is resident of 484/13, Vishal Colony Patti, Tarn Taran and as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019, where the person is residing can file the complaint within that District, therefore, this commission has jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint.
7 In the present case, it is not disputed that the complainant has approached to the opposite party for cardiography test and it is also not disputed that the opposite party has received Rs. 2600/- from the complainant for the said test. The case of the complainant is that he has paid Rs. 2600/- for the above said test and the opposite party has received Rs. 2,600/- from the complainant and opposite party installed machine/ holter in the body of the complainant but the said holter / machine has not given any result. To prove his contention, the complainant has placed on record Ex. C-5 i.e. ECO test report. In which no result has been shown. On the other hands the stand of the opposite party is that the opposite party has affixed their machine/ holter in the body of the complainant and thereafter the complainant went to his house and during the night, the complainant has not followed the instructions and directions given to him and even has not removed the machine as per instructions and guidelines given to the complainant and due to the said negligence and carelessness of the complainant there was no significance recording due to some artifacts and as such, he was advised for review again with recording again but he has not done so intentionally and willfully. This was offered without any charge. As such, from the pleadings of the opposite party, it is admitted by them that the machine/holter has not given any result and they offered the complainant for review again with recording again and offered without any charge. The opposite party has alleged that the complainant has not followed the instructions and directions given to him and has not removed the machine as per instructions and guidelines given to the complainant. But the opposite party has miserably failed to prove on record which instructions and directions were given to the complainant and which instructions and guidelines have not been followed by the complainant. The opposite party has not placed on record any document to show that the complainant has not followed the instructions and directions. The complainant is a heart patient and he went to the opposite party for test when he was not feeling well and doctor advised him for ECO Cardiography test and these were the very sensitive/critical days for the complainant. The opposite party has received Rs. 2,600/- from the complainant but their holter/machine has not given any result of ECO Cardiogarphy test and after that on demand of Rs. 2,600/-, the opposite party has not returned the same to the complainant, it amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Moreover, the complainant has spent the money upon his vehicle to reach the centre of opposite party for his ECO Test. The complaint has specifically mentioned that he has spent around Rs. 950/- on his private car and the opposite party has not denied this fact. Therefore, the complainant is also entitled for the refund of this amount. Further the opposite party has shattered the trust of the complainant by not providing suitable results, the complainant affixed the holter machine for whole night, definitely it would have caused inconvenience to the old person because several leads or wires are attached to the monitor and further these leads connect to electrodes that are placed on the skin of human chest with a glue like, but the outcome of same was Zero, it amounts to deficiency in service. The authorities submitted by the opposite party in the present case are of different facts and circumstances and does not cover to the facts of the present case.
8 In view of above discussion the present complaint is allowed and the opposite party is directed to return Rs. 2,600/- to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 950/- from the opposite party. The complainant has been harassed by the opposite party, the complainant is also entitled to Rs. 7,500/- (Rs. Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) as compensation on account of harassment and Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) as litigation expenses. Opposite party is directed to comply with the order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum, on the awarded amount, from the date of complaint till its realisation. This complaint could not be decided within prescribed period due to heavy pendency of cases in this commission and COVID-19. Copy of order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in Open Commission
9.3.2022
